MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Starter Culture Development and Innovation for Novel Fermented Foods

2023· review· en· W4389358874 on OpenAlexaff
Michael G. Gänzle, Ludovic Monnin, Jinshui Zheng, Lingxiao Zhang, Monika Coton, Delphine Sicard, Jens Walter

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Food Science and Technology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicProbiotics and Fermented Foods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarterFermentation in food processingBiotechnologyBusinessSelection (genetic algorithm)Food safetyFermentationFood scienceBiologyComputer scienceBacteriaLactic acidArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in fermented foods is increasing because fermented foods are promising solutions for more secure food systems with an increased proportion of minimally processed plant foods and a smaller environmental footprint. These developments also pertain to novel fermented food for which no traditional template exists, raising the question of how to develop starter cultures for such fermentations. This review establishes a framework that integrates traditional and scientific knowledge systems for the selection of suitable cultures. Safety considerations, the use of organisms in traditional food fermentations, and the link of phylogeny to metabolic properties provide criteria for culture selection. Such approaches can also select for microbial strains that have health benefits. A science-based approach to the development of novel fermented foods can substantially advance their value through more secure food systems, food products that provide health-promoting microbes, and the provision of foods that improve human health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Food Science and TechnologySame topicProbiotics and Fermented FoodsFrench-language works237,207